OT: RIgged officiating in the NBA?

People have made the very reasonable argument that in a multi-billion dollar industry (sports) that depends to a certain degree on "judgment calls" that there HAS to be a less than insignificant level of "cheating" by officials.

We see cheating in every other aspect, but we refuse sometimes to acknowledge its possibility by officials. Even after a ref or two comes out to and comments that it happens. I think that we convince ourselves to believe it is not true because we love to watch the games. If we were to discuss and even possibly accept that the playing field may not be equal it would fundamentally undermine something EVERYONE on here loves (sports). We won't allow ourselves to believe it is possible.

With that said, it is also very difficult to prove. This video (from Reddit, yes) is pretty interesting:

Either that or the NBA has a difficult time finding refs who are very good at... reffing.

I think in order to use this kind of evidence to build any kind of an argument either way, you would have to take a random sample of NBA games and measure the number of incorrect calls, and then take a sample of "important" NBA games and measure the number of incorrect calls to determine if there is any correlation.

I think you would need to measure calls for important plays. Refs can cover their tracks by throwing a couple insignifiant fouls out there. Plus, it may not be the important games. It could be like Toledo and point shaving. The games no one cares about are primed for corruption.

WHile I agree that some people are just bad, you have to think that only helps cover those that have ill intent.

I dont think you can pull off a grand conspiracy across the league. I just think that there is ample motivation and opportunity combined with an inability to really determine if refs are bad or on the take. It seems very very possible.

When home market fans started buying tons of tickets to see away team players on the road (Jordan, Kobe, Shaq), the league realized there were great market profits outside of the traditional competition model.

So, in some instances, it was better for the league to promote stars over competition.

That game was horribly rigged. The Kings outplayed the Lakers for the entire game and lost because of made up fouls combined with blatant no-calls. This is nothing new in the NBA though. Anyone here old enough to remember the phantom foul that cost the Pistons against the Lakers in 88? It should have been three in a row for the Bad Boys.

I remember watching this series and seeing the Kings completely outplay the Lakers but get totally jobbed by the refs. It was ridiculous. One phantom foul after another went against the Kings on the offensive and defensive end. Shaq would just bull over a defender and they'd call a defensive foul - then as you see in the video, a Laker would flop when Webber got the ball and they'd call a foul on Webber. Clearly, the fix was in. The NBA must have wanted the big market Lakers to prevail over the smaller market Kings. The Kings were far better, the class of the league that year and one of the best teams ever, and played far better than the Lakers. It was sad to see them go out that way, not losing but being robbed. It was also sad for CWebb who deserved a championship that year. IMO, the Kings were the true champions that year even though the Lakers were "officially" literally given the championship.

There's a great article on "roundballdaily.com" on this travesty called "The Lost Champions." There's also reference to the fixed officiating in the wikipedia entry for 2002 NBA playoffs. A referee even testified under oath to the feds about the fixed officiating.

That series was clearly rigged. It wasn't by the NBA though, it was a certain referee who liked to gamble and ended up in prison.

They definitely have a problem with the refereeing though. Joey Crawford, for instance, hated Allen Iverson, and so gamblers knew if he was officiating a 76ers game, you bet against the 76ers because it was almost a lock. He's also the guy who actually T'd up Tim Duncan. Tim Duncan! Stuff like that needs to change.

It would be foolish to assume that cheating doesn't occur, but a certain amount of cheating that everyone seems to accept already goes on: giving preferential treatment to superstars has been going on for at least 30 years. It's great when the superstar is on your team; it sucks when he's on the other team.

NBA refs "manage" the games too much for my tastes anyway. I don't know if it's rigging so much, but letting the league's stars (and biggest money magnets) get away with way more of everything takes a lot of joy out of watching NBA for me.

mind. The NBA has been rigged for many years. I think all the way back to when the Pistons played the Lakers in the 80's. For sure the last time the Pistons won the NBA championship. That series had no business going 5 games, but the NBA thought the Lakers should win at least one game. The end of game 4 was an absolute joke, and I think even the Pistons were in on extending the series to at least 5 games.

If my wife was coaching the Pistons, they would have won game 4, instead, the Pistons allow the Lakers to inbound the ball to Shaq, don't immediately foul him, and allow him to pass the ball to Kobe who dillies and dallies for a few seconds (they don't foul him either) and then drains a wide open three from the top of the key to either win it or send it to OT. I was enraged at the time, and haven't watched an NBA game since.

for the error. It was game 2 that went into OT and the Pistons lost. Still, it was very fishy how it ended, and other than the remaining games of that series, I haven't watched an NBA game since. Thanks for the correction. And apologies to the first gentleman who caught my mistake above too.

I did watch the rest of the series, but it did infuriate me the way game 2 played out. Like I said, the way the last 8-10 seconds of that game in regulation was played, it was obviously an effort to let LA win a game at home and force the series to go at least 5 games. It was too easy for the Pistons to win game 2 for it to be anything else. But yeah, back then, your description of a 'tight grip' is very accurate. Cooled off a bit since then, but still don't respect the NBA. Appreciate your input.

I'm very similar, actually. My interest in the NBA was almost completely gone when the Pistons started being relative in the early 2000's. I only began watching again because I liked the way that version of the Pistons played (aggressive defense & spread the ball on offense).

Since the Pistons last conference championship game (2006/2007?), I've probably watched a total of 15 minutes of NBA games.

It's a boring version of the game. It's all isolation plays. I'd rather watch a Gus Macker tournament or pick-up basketball.

Honestly, is it the "brand of basketball" that's the problem or just the fact that the local team has sucked?

I have a hard time following the Pistons right now, but if they turn it around (and they might in the future, assuming Drummond makes a full recovery), I'll watch. It's really hard to remain loyal to a terrible pro team. I'll watch Michigan win or lose, but I'm not willing to make the same sacrifice for the Detroit teams.

I bet if the Pistons become a playoff contender again, we'll suddenly see a lot more NBA posts here, with people praising the Pistons for "playing the right way." The right way, of course, is winning.

Six or seven years ago (long enough ago that I was still listening to sports radio) when it came about about that NBA ref who was shaving points, a retired NBA ref admitted there was unspoken pressure from the league to help certain teams and certain players, especially in the playoffs. Paraphrasing here: "Nothing was ever said; they made their objectives known and if you did right you got the better jobs."

Yes, to a degree the NBA is rigged; you still have to be good enough to get to plausibility. If you're gonna be an NBA fan you have to live with this fact.

I have not watched the NBA on a regular basis since that farce of a series. I root for the Pistons and all but I just don't follow as closely as I did years ago.

Also: I was at a Pistons-Warriors game the season Detroit last won a title. One ref blatantly baited Rip Hamilton into a technical foul. Larry Brown went ballistic as did the crowd because the replay showed Rip was called for a bogus foul, didn't chew out the ref except say 'what did I do' and then get T'd up. Years later, I found out Tim Donaghy was one of the refs that game. One can argue coincide but I don't buy it.

Stern has hated the Pistons since he got in the league. He couldn't stand how they were beating Jordan in the late 80s and he hate the Pistons in the mid 2000s. What I can't stand is Stern always acts like a complete jackass whenever someone questions the refs in the NBA

But even if so, the Pistons have been to the NBA Finals five times, and won three championships, during Stern's tenure as commissioner. So either he isn't doing much to hold the Pistons down or he's really incompetent at it.

OR instead of throwing out the baby with the bathwater, just do as all NBA fans do and incorporate this into the narrative. The Pistons couldn't get a call against the Lakers in '04 but then dominated that Finals to such a degree that it's still remembered as "The 5-0 Sweep." Pistons fans know there's certain refs who will duke us, and certain refs who will call it depending on who we're playing (for example the notorious Bavetta is an enemy against Lakers and Celtics but helpful against Nets).

Just like WWE, it's quite enjoyable if you let your brain give up on thinking it's about competitive spirit, and sit back and enjoy the drama.

Except the WWE is a story based form of entertainment whereas sports is a competition that is supposed to be legitimate. Winners and losers don't matter in the WWE because you know in the end it's just advancing the story. Winners and losers do matter in professional sports, so when a league shows a blatant disregard for objectivity I can't watch any more. I honestly couldn't even name half the players on the Pistons anymore because I just don't watch the NBA.

People like to make fun of the "fake" wrestling but the credibility of the NBA is nearly as bad.

But why stop there? We tend to assume that other sports are legit but is there really any reason to assume the the NFL, MLB, golf, olympics, whatever are clean? I guess the cynic in me is the reason that I'm a "casual fan" at best. It just not worth giving your heart (or much of your money) to watching sports.

Edit: And for whatever it's worth, I do enjoy watching the silliness of the WWE. The NBA not so much.

the Pistons got Lebroned by the refs, but they also got a sweetheart whistle for two years under Larry Brown. The zebras let the Pistons get away with outright assault against the Lakers in the Finals and Chauncey mastered the hip flop and shot like 20 free throws a game in 2005.

...if the NBA is rigged, doesn't it stand to reason that the NFL, MLB, or college sports has something going on somewhere? Why would it be just the NBA? There are the same type of fould calls in CBB. And, a lot of missed, judgment calls in FB.

I can't believe if it is happening that it would only happen in one sport.

In today's day and age, it's not nearly as bad. Noone doubts the Kings-Lakers Game 6 was fixed; early 00s it was bad, and even then you had the Pistons/Spurs (definitely not "company teams") dominating the league.

It has clearly gotten better since the early '00s, and hopefully there is some accountability moving forward. But to say issues like this only impact the NBA seems somewhat ignorant; basketball is the sport where officials have the most visible impact, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen elsewhere.

Even looking solely at basketball, I'm sure you could find quite a few Big Ten games this season that would have had different results if officiated "correctly" (most obvious to us being the Wisconsin game, where OT was an absolute travesty).

1. Basketball calls are just so difficult to call, especially calls on charges, block and foul. (e.g,. Mitch's block on the Kansas's dude dunk is clean but it's called a foul; Louvsille woman basketball player flopped but it's called a charge on the Baylor offensive player). So opportunity to make a mistake is much higher than other sports.

2. This is America - where people value ethics (I think) in sports. For sure someone will speak up about thse non-ethical behaviors if it comes up, esp. those who are at the receiving ends of bad calls? There has to be traces in which refs are rigged.

I just don't see how the refs are rigged. Yes, it's a lot of money, but so it's many other sports. Is the baseball empire rigged too? How about the soccer ref (that happened in Italy which is a more corrupt country than US I suppose)? All the same. Lots of tough cals to make, but basketball is just plain difficult to call - thus controversy.

If the calls were easy to make it would be harder to rig games. I'm not so sure about your comparison to other sports either. There are far more opportunities to squeeze or expand the strike zone in baseball and more close calls for holding or interference in football. As to your second point, the fans, announcers and players complain all the time, but leagues fine coaches that publicly criticize the officiating. NBA games have been rigged and probably still are. Refs will always make some bad calls, but there are also some made on purpose. What we don't know is how often it happens and we often have to guess as to why.

For the first reason, what I'm trying to say is that it's relatively easier for refers to make a mistakes in basketball: just very difficult to call. For the second point, I'm not sure why refs can make bad calls on purpose. I seriously don't. Remember they have to make a split-second decision, whereas we have more than 10x opportunities to review a play.

All I'm saying is: referees like other people make mistakes, sometimes in favor of a team, other times in favor of another team. But we tend to remember those that they make the mistakes that have big-time consequences, not those that are minor. I simply think it's very difficult for one referees to rig, and when the number of refs rigging increase, the chance of rigging being discovered increases.

You are right that there will be plenty of mistakes. One can't point at a blown call as evidence of cheating. At the same time, the presence of many mistakes makes it much easier to cheat. Refs don't have to work together to cheat. That would be more effective, but also greatly increases the chances of getting caught. One ref can change the outcome of games often enough. Only the the truly bad cheaters make sure they win every single time. The league can rig games very simply. Tell the refs, for example, to crack down on the overly physical play of a team before a playoff series. Some refs will make bad calls on purpose because they are people. Maybe they have money on a game, maybe there is personal animosity, maybe they are trying to make up for previous bad calls, maybe they are following instructions.

I despise the NBA. Can't watch more than a minute of it before switching channels. I used to be an NBA junkie in the 80's and early 90's, but just grew so tired of it. This is why I'm so depressed to see Trey Burke potentially leave for the greener NBA pastures after only 2 years in Ann Arbor...I will probably never watch him on the hardcourt again.

Yes. Loved watching in the 80's, but became gradually more and more dissatisfied with it. About the time Shaq was with the Lakers and was allowed to just lower the shoulder and run over anyone who tried to guard him was when I really started to hate watching. And then game 6 of the 2002 Western conference finals finished it for me. Every couple years I try to watch a game, but it doesn't take long to remember why I hate it.

I think it would be safe to say though that as unbiased as refs want to be, they're gonna give the benefit of the doubt to an NBA superstar over anyone else. Why? Because the sport wants to solidify them as being virtuous, hardworking, honest heroes and therefore if a superstar player acts in a certain way ("not" fouling, or flopping), refs will go along with it instead of trying to stand up against it.

Other than that, it's a pretty solidified notion that good officiating is rare. It's a difficult job in real time.

In one of my classes a few years ago there was a guy that sat beside me who had been an ump in minor league baseball. I asked him who he rooted for and he said "I hate every one of those motherfuckers" He explained that they were treated so poorly by every team and its fans that it made it impossible to root for anyone. I asked him if umps slanted calls based on how a team treated them each game and his response was "I am sure it happens to a degree without the umps even realizing it. It would seem to be human nature." However, he did say that no ump he had known ever purposely made bad calls. The ump system he explained worked much the same way the system does for players. You get promoted up through the ranks of the minor leagues just like a player and your ultimate goal is the majors. Making bad calls would mean never getting promoted. The guy i was talking with had been "let go" after eight years umping in the minors the same way a player gets released from a team. His answers seemed legit considering he had been released and was obviously bitter about it.

I never really cared for the NBA much anyway. I suppose part of it came from not growing up in a town with a team, but after the Malice at the Palace, I just came to believe that the league as a whole was a joke anyway.

I used to love the NBA in the late 80's and 90"s. I have always been a Pacer fan, and the series that really told me how the NBA works was the Pacers-Bulls 97 7 game series. Game 7, Mark Jackson fouls Michael Jordan on a fast break, Jordan proceeds to throw the ball into the back of Jacksons head, normally a technical foul for anyone, but not the great MJ. We end up loosing momentum and losing game 7. That game showed me how rigged the league was. Not to mention the fact that stars get preferential treatment, which in itself is cheating. Like I said, I am a Pacer fan and love Reggie, but like MJ and most of the league, these guys would travel every time they got the ball. I never understood why traveling and carrying was never called. There is a lot I don't like about the NBA, and yes that Lakers Kings series and the Lakers Blazers series were some of the biggest travesties in sports entertainment.

I love the posters who just flatly say "of course it's rigged." As if they've seen enough evidence to conclude that there is a widespread conspiracy involving multiple refs.

The reddit video is a statistically meaningless sampling. You'd need to study games across the board. And of course the video doesn't take into consideration bad calls that may have gone against the Lakers.

If you're gonna be a conspiracy theorist, at least bring persuasive evidence.

The reason there aren't more mass conspiracies is simple: it takes a lot of people to a) pull them off and b) keep their mouths shut. People, in the end, rarely stay quiet.

The Kings always comes up, and the Trail Blazers, but man, the whole run by Miami that year was the biggest shift in oficiating I have ever seen. Dwayne Wade had been a really good player, but hadn't earned superstar status yet (he was still probably the second best player on his team) and then all of a sudden he starts getting calls like he was Michael Jordan after 6 championships. Not only was it superstar calls, but it was unearned superstar calls. It was like Stern needed some new stars (how long could he let Detroit and San Antonio make up the Finals?), Miami was hot and hip with Shaq down there now, so he created them. Guys used to get the "you get breathed on it's a foul calls" but they had to earn something in the playoffs before they had shown they deserve it. Wade was just anointed.

And as bad as the Pistons got the shaft in the Eastern Conference Finals, it was 10x more outrageous what happened to the Mavs. That was borderline Kings stuff there. (I'm sure it being Cuban's team didn't help favor them either).

And as weird as it is I totally forgot what happened to the Pistons in the ECF.

I remember Sheed saying "They wanted their King and they got him." or something like that after the game. Now most people hate Sheed because he is very polarizing. I love him just like I loved Rodman, etc. Anyway people gave Sheed so much shit for saying that when he was absolutely right in saying it.

Your recollection of the Wade - DAL series is spot on. That series is rarely remembered, but it was completely absurd. Just as bad as the Kings-Lakers thing.

To play devils advocate a bit here. I always thought it was strange when the Pistons swept the Lakers as well. It seemed as though Ben Wallace was just crushing Shaq and there weren't as many fouls called. Then the very next year it was as if the rules changed and "physical defense" went away. If you go back and watch that series it really does look like a different game than how it is called now.

When they started imploding on each other and really became unlikable. I think those Pistons were physical, but not overtly dirty. (The Bad Boys used to cross that line more). But I think the turning point was when the Pistons went back and then played the Spurs, and it was two fundamental, team oriented organizations matching up, and after all the talk of "team basketball being back" Stern went "what am I doing?!?! We need more superstars!!" and suddenly stuff that was ok became fouls. That's one of the reasons they let Ben go to Chicago, because they knew the things he did best weren't going to be allowed anymore, and while worthwhile to have, he wouldn't be as effective anymore.

But the other side of that is unless you really suck in a year that an actual superstar comes out and win the lottery, you're never going to be considered a team that has a chance at winning it all. Which is great for national ratings, but doesn't do a lot for local markets.

I mean, Cuban is constantly calling out Stern for things he thinks are wrong. Sometimes he's right, sometimes he's not, but there's no love lost. Cuban may be the most fined NBA person since the Bad Boys funded the NBA offices.

Honestly, that is my policy when it comes to the NBA, it is so utterly messed up that it isn't worth watching. If you're not in a major market, good luck making the playoffs. Oh sure, you might look good, but aside from minor blips, the only teams that will win the titles in the near future will be the Heat, the Lakers, and other major cities, while everyone else just gets a slap on the back for showing up.

It's not worth getting angry over any more for me, I just would prefer doing something else with my time.

I can't believe this is still being questioned. The NBA has been rigged for years. Several people have come out and revealed this, but the NBA administration finds a way to discredit those individuals.

I'm just surprised that they players act surprised anymore. They already know what's going on. They could even be implicit in the fix as far as I'm concerned.

The fact you put the NBA ahead of boxing shows that while you do have a grasp on the level of riggedness (is that a word?) in pro sports, you really need to watch more boxing.

Boxing decisions are routinely called outrageous and if you are fighting a guy in his home country/city, be prepared to knock his ass out or lose. I used to love boxing before a series of terrible decisions (culminating in the Pacquiao-Bradley fight) turned me off the sport for good.

Now, the NBA certainly, um, has delved into some questionable tactics in the past (that Kings-Lakers game is certainly Exhibit A), but it's not outwardly fixed like boxing.

'99 Eastern Conf. Finals (phantom 4 point play for Larry Johnson, every game has at least 2-3 calls go against Pacers so Knicks can make the Finals)

I'd say the '00 Blazers got screwed (without looking it up, Lakers shot 40 free throws in Game 7, Blazers shot like 10), but they also turned the ball over a zillion times and looked lost throughout the 4th quarter.

I'm not a big fan of David Stern and agree that superstars basically get a friendlier whistle than other players, but the league actually has been pretty consistent about suspending players who leave the bench to walk onto the court. One year it suspended several Knick players against the Heat, which effectively cost them that series (and cost the NBA a marquee Knicks-Bulls matchup in the next round).

Even in the example you cite, Steve Nash was a much more marketable star than Horry, so if anything they should have protected him and his team. San Antonio was never a crowd-pleaser of a team. The fact that the Spurs have won four championships since 1999 would seem to refute some of the allegations of the league being rigged. It would make no sense for them to repeatedly favor a small-market team playing a pretty boring brand of basketball.